• Energy Research

Abstract This analysis contributes to recent efforts to better understand the evolution of energy security in a low-carbon world. Our objective was to assess how energy security may change over the course of the century, and to what extent these changes depend on the uncertainty of the factors that drive the evolution of energy systems, including future technologies, improved energy efficiency, fossil fuel resources and markets, and economic growth. To this end, we focused on Europe and on a set of energy security indicators based on three perspectives: sovereignty, robustness and resilience. A database of scenarios allowed us to account for the large uncertainties surrounding the determinants of future energy systems. We then analyzed the way energy security indicators evolve over time, and how their trajectories vary across scenarios. We identified the indicators that vary the most between scenarios, i.e., the indicators whose future evolution is the most uncertain. For these indicators, we performed an analysis of variance to estimate the contribution of each driver to the uncertainty of the indicators. The paper shows that the European double target of significantly decreasing CO 2 emissions and increasing the security of the supply of energy may be difficult to reach. Nevertheless, some levers could facilitate the transition to a low-carbon society while improving energy security, or by limiting its degradation. The results emphasize not only the importance of policies in favor of low or zero carbon technologies in power generation but also the differences in their contributions to the complete uncertainty of the indicators. Policies promoting energy efficiency also play a role but only in the resilience of TPES. These policies are thus important levers for mitigating the negative impacts of climate policies on energy security.

Border adjustments are currently discussed to limit the possible adverse impact of climate policies on competitiveness and carbon leakage. We discuss the main choices that will have to be made if the European Union implements such a system alongside with the EU ETS. Although more analysis is required on some issues, on others some design options seem clearly preferable to others. First, the import adjustment should be a requirement to surrender allowances rather than a tax. Second, the general rule to determine the amount of allowances per ton imported should be the product-specific benchmarks that the European Commission is currently elaborating for a different purpose (i.e. to determine the amount of free allowances). Third, this obligation should apply when the exported product is registered at the EU border, and not after the end of the year as is the case for domestic emitters. Fourth, the export adjustment should take the form of a rebate on the amount of allowances a domestic emitter has to surrender. Five, this rebate should equal the above-mentioned product-specific benchmarks, not the emissions of the particular exporting plant or firm. Finally, the adjustment does not have to apply to consumer products but mostly to basic products.

The EU ETS has been criticised for threatening the competitiveness of European industry and generating carbon leakage, i.e. increasing foreign greenhouse gas emissions. Two main options have been put forward to tackle these concerns: border adjustments and output-based allocation, i.e. allocation of free allowances in proportion to current production. We compare various configurations of these two options, as well as a scenario with full auctioning and no border adjustment. Against this background, we develop a model of the main sectors covered by the EU ETS: electricity, steel, cement and aluminium. We conclude that the most efficient way to tackle leakage is auctioning with border adjustment, which generally induces a negative leakage (a spillover). This holds even if the border adjustment does not include indirect emissions, if it is based on EU (rather than foreign) specific emissions, or (for some values of the parameters) if it covers only imports. Another relatively efficient policy is to combine auctioning in the electricity sector and output-based allocation in exposed industries, especially if free allowances are given both for direct and indirect emissions, i.e. those generated by the generation of the electricity consumed. Although output-based allocation is generally less effective than border adjustment to tackle leakage, it is more effective to mitigate production losses in the sectors affected by the ETS, which may ease climate policy adoption. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Unilateral climate policy, such as carbon pricing, represents an additional cost to the economy, especially to energy-intensive industrial sectors, as well as those exposed to international competition. A border carbon adjustment (BCA) is often presented as an attractive policy option for countries that wish to go ahead without waiting for a global climate agreement. We used the computable general equilibrium model MIRAGE to simulate the impact of the introduction of a BCA on imports of energy-intensive products in EU and EFTA countries and to evaluate the exports their main trade partners would lose. Given that a BCA is a trade measure, it might cause disputes at the World Trade Organization (WTO). If the BCA is considered illegal, the losses suffered by some partners may justify trade retaliations. At that point, it would be likely that prohibitive retaliatory tariffs target sensitive products in the EU, which are often related to the European agricultural sector. These trade measures would limit the drop in production in the energy-intensive and trade-exposed (EITE) sectors, but at the expense of the other sectors. Nevertheless, neither the BCA nor retaliation would have sizeable impacts on real income or GDP in the EU or on the retaliators, while leading to a small decrease in global emissions.

The prospect of higher carbon taxation raises concerns that these policies could hinder the ability of domestic industry to compete in export markets, especially for energy-intensive sectors. The recent jump in energy prices leads to even greater worries. This paper investigates the impact of a change in energy prices on export patterns of manufacturing firms using a large panel of French firms observed from 2001 to 2015. The identification strategy uses a fixed weight energy price index as a shift-share instrumental variable for the average energy cost. For the average firm we find that a 10% increase in the energy cost is associated with a 3.6% decrease in total export value, a 1.3% decrease in the number of export destinations, and a 2.3% increase in export prices. But there are substantial heterogeneities between firms facing a similar increase in energy costs and the impact of an energy cost increase differs from one destination export to another. ; non ; oui ; recherche ; International